It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GOP wants to eliminate shadowy DOJ slush fund bankrolling leftist groups

page: 1
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Who would have known that the folks that brought you BLM among other groups may have been receiving government funding...



The Obama administration funneled billions of dollars to activist organizations through a Department of Justice slush fund scheme, according to congressional investigator


No wonder the Dems were so angry about losing...my guess is that some heads are gonna roll for this




Findings spearheaded by the House Judiciary Committee point to a process shrouded in secrecy whereby monies were distributed to a labyrinth of nonprofit organizations involved with grass-roots activism.

www.foxnews.com...




posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:28 PM
link   
NAIL then to the wall for all to see.




posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

One can only hope so. Maybe we can start to see just how deep the swamp is through the murk once we kill these snakes and other varmints.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   
yeah they are mad about losing because all their corruption will be uncovered winning was the only thing that would save them and the democrat party.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Oh good, another multi-million dollar investigation that will result in no finding of fact.

From the Fox News article:



Both the Government Accountability Office and Congressional Research Service have concluded that the settlement agreements do not violate Congress’ power of the purse. But others disagree.


LInk to the Senate Report

NOWHERE in that report is it mentioned that funds are going to La Raza, etc. Fox News provides no source for this claim.

It's not secret, it's not unknown, it's not covert, etc.

Next?

ETA: That said, if it is found that the DOJ filtered funds to any groups that were not directly effected by the settlement actions, someone should burn for it.
edit on 1-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

As long as there wasn't an existing law to penalize something, GO WITH IT!!!!

Right?


edit on 1-3-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Arizonaguy

Thanks for picking this up, Arizona. F&S.
Few if any peeps from the Leftoid festival of Trump
bashing about the obvious here...

But think about the crapstorm you'd get: if the DOJ
was tasked and funded for a joint project with the
FBI to eliminate black market guns-- and somebody
at the FBI just arbitrarily gave a wad to the NRA?

I always thought the House had the power of the purse.
Looks lately like the grifters on both sides forgot that one.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Gryphon66

As long as there wasn't an existing law to penalize something, GO WITH IT!!!!

Right?



Not at all. You're typically bouncing about with hyperbole. See above added citations.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
When I heard about this earlier, I thought about creating a thread myself, but the depths of corruption on this one is deep and dirty and I was too p**sed about Obama's gall in doing this, I needed to just breathe.

You know he just knew Hillary was going to be his third term. What a bunch of lowlifes.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Gryphon66

As long as there wasn't an existing law to penalize something, GO WITH IT!!!!

Right?



I've always worried about that saying from the econ pro-
fessor back when... "An action is legitimate until a law
is passed making that action illegal."

It might be the reason this country's moral compass is
broken. We haven't used it in over fifty years-- it got
buried in garbage piling up on the table, and fell off.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords
When I heard about this earlier, I thought about creating a thread myself, but the depths of corruption on this one is deep and dirty and I was too p**sed about Obama's gall in doing this, I needed to just breathe.

You know he just knew Hillary was going to be his third term. What a bunch of lowlifes.


Again, see the Senate report from May 2016.

Not new, no evidence that funds went to "lefist groups" ... but if it did, you're right someone needs to be burned for it.

The Fox News article uses loaded and emotional language to appeal to the base. This matter is known and has been investigated. The CBO, as noted, has stated there's nothing illegal or unconstitutional about it.

Link to Senate Report from May 2016
edit on 1-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

We shall see, won't we? At the very least the public will be aware of these dirty dealings. Another nail in the Dem's coffin



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   
This goes back to a WSJ article from 2015:

Justice's Liberal Slush Fund

(Now, I don't have a subscription to WSJ, but this proves that it's not a "new question.")



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
a reply to: Gryphon66

We shall see, won't we? At the very least the public will be aware of these dirty dealings. Another nail in the Dem's coffin


Possibly. But this has been investigated for two years with no finding of illegal activity.

I'm working on this part of the Senate report:



To further induce companies to go the donation route, Justice considers these handouts to be worth “double credit” against penalty obligations. So while direct forms of victim relief are still counted dollar-for-dollar, a $500,000 donation by [Bank of America] to La Raza takes at least $1 million of the company’s bill.97

Specifically, both the Citigroup and Bank of America settlement agreements include provisions providing a two-for-one credit for donations to third-party groups.98 For example, for every dollar the bank donates to a HUD-approved housing counseling agency, it receives two dollars in credit towards its total settlement obligation.99


I haven't been able to follow up on the evidence that any funds (either directly or indirectly) went to these mentioned groups mostly because I'm not going to put money in Rupert Murdoch's pocket.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Ah ... working through the Senate Report:




While the DOJ does not have a direct role in distributing consumer relief funds to each specific third-party group, the settlements signed by the DOJ require the banks to distribute money to organizations that provide community development, housing counseling, and mortgage assistance.

For example, Bank of America has distributed money to the following groups:

• The National Council of La Raza ($1.5 million);

• The National Community Reinvestment Coalition ($2.6 million); and

• The National Urban League ($1.15 million).126

The settlement agreements, however, do not specify how these third-party groups must precisely use the funding.


So, strictly speaking, DOJ didn't distribute money to anyone. So, the OP's language is ... just a bit biased and emotion-laced.

Still, it smacks of BS, that I will admit. But ... again, it's not new, and it's been investigated.

Anyone interested should follow up on the Senate report ... tons of good citations in there.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Why are you so quick to defend and deflect?

With what has been presented, do you think it is possible that the Obama adminstration funneled money to activist organizations?

It is a yes or no question that can you answer without rhetoric.
edit on 2017-03-01T21:05:17-06:002201701America/Chicago3 by c2oden because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Seriously, I want my money then, seems like the anarchist got ignored again



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
Seriously, I want my money then, seems like the anarchist got ignored again


You must seek better crony connections.




posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: c2oden
a reply to: Gryphon66

Why are you so quick to defend and deflect?

With what has been presented, do you think it is possible that the Obama adminstration funneled money to activist organizations?

It is a yes or no question that can you answer without rhetoric.


Defend and deflect???

I linked actual sources that speak to the topic. Do some reading and get back to me.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
Seriously, I want my money then, seems like the anarchist got ignored again


Would you take it if they offered it to you? LOL.

You'll have to become a community developer.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join